Knowledge vacuum: An organizational learning dynamic of how e-government innovations fail

Abstract In spite of attempting to implement e-government innovations to enhance efficiency in public organizations for several decades, e-government innovation has often not met the expectations of citizens, legislatures, or the organizations. Although a wide range of causes from poor planning to improper implementation have been suggested for explanation of failures, it is still challenging to theoretically construct an explanation of what the overarching dynamic is behind those causes. To further develop the understanding of the conditions of unrealized benefits of e-government innovation, we propose a conceptual framework of a knowledge vacuum, which is an organizational condition in which excessive exploration and organizational inertia interact to create a vicious cycle of low performance. We first review the history of e-government and factors that affect the success and failure of e-government innovation. Next, we develop the conceptual framework, and apply the concept to review an e-government innovation failure case for an illustrative purpose. We conclude by discussing theoretical and practical implications of the conceptual framework and its limitations in understanding the current state of e-government innovations.

[1]  P. Hall,et al.  Political Science and the Three New Institutionalisms , 1996 .

[2]  Jiaqin Yang,et al.  E-government application at local level: issues and challenges: an empirical study , 2005, Electron. Gov. an Int. J..

[3]  Maha Shaikh,et al.  Negotiating open source software adoption in the UK public sector , 2016, Gov. Inf. Q..

[4]  Caroline J. Tolbert,et al.  Institutions, Policy Innovation, and E-Government in the American States , 2008 .

[5]  Ae-Sook Kim,et al.  The evolution of an innovation: variations in medicaid managed care program extensiveness. , 2012, Journal of health politics, policy and law.

[6]  Katherine G. Willoughby,et al.  Local Governments as E-Governments: Meeting the Implementation Challenge , 2005 .

[7]  Barry Bozeman,et al.  Public management information systems: theory and prescription , 1986 .

[8]  G. David Garson.  Modern Public Information Technology Systems: Issues and Challenges , 2007 .

[9]  Laurence J. O'Toole,et al.  Networks and Networking: The Public Administrative Agendas , 2015 .

[10]  Claire A. Dunlop,et al.  Pathologies of Policy Learning: What are they and how do they Contribute to Policy Failure? , 2017, Policy Learning and Policy Failure.

[11]  S. Goldfinch,et al.  Pessimism, Computer Failure, and Information Systems Development in the Public Sector , 2007 .

[12]  Kenneth L. Kraemer,et al.  Technological Innovation in American Local Governments: The Case of Computing , 1980 .

[13]  Richard D. Waters,et al.  Squawking, tweeting, cooing, and hooting: analyzing the communication patterns of government agencies on Twitter , 2011 .

[14]  Pierre Morizet-Mahoudeaux,et al.  Please Scroll down for Article International Journal of Human-computer Interaction Ramses: a Method for the Design Process of Interactive Information Systems Ramses: a Method for the Design Process of Interactive Information Systems , 2022 .

[15]  M. Howlett,et al.  Studying Public Policy: Policy Cycles and Policy Subsystems , 1996 .

[16]  Forrest V. Morgeson,et al.  Does E‐Government Measure Up to E‐Business? Comparing End User Perceptions of U.S. Federal Government and E‐Business Web Sites , 2009 .

[17]  M. Brown,et al.  Learning Organizations in the Public Sector? A Study of Police Agencies Employing Information and Technology To Advance Knowledge. , 2003 .

[18]  Marguerite Schneider,et al.  Characteristics of Innovation and Innovation Adoption in Public Organizations: Assessing the Role of Managers , 2009 .

[19]  Anthony Arundel,et al.  Complexity of Innovation in the public sector: A workgroup-level analysis of related factors and outcomes , 2016 .

[20]  Patrick Dunleavy,et al.  New public management is dead. Long live digital-era governance , 2005 .

[21]  S. Bretschneider,et al.  The "Publicness Puzzle" in Organization Theory: A Test of Alternative Explanations of Differences between Public and Private Organizations* , 1994 .

[22]  S. Borins,et al.  Encouraging innovation in the public sector , 2001 .

[23]  Torsten Oliver Salge,et al.  A Behavioral Model of Innovative Search: Evidence from Public Hospital Services , 2011 .

[24]  P. Hall.  Policy paradigms, social learning, and the state: the case of economic policymaking in Britain , 1993 .

[25]  F. Damanpour,et al.  Managerial Innovation: Conceptions, Processes and Antecedents , 2012, Management and Organization Review.

[26]  Daniel A. Levinthal,et al.  ABSORPTIVE CAPACITY: A NEW PERSPECTIVE ON LEARNING AND INNOVATION , 1990 .

[27]  James L. Perry,et al.  Outsourcing for E-Government , 2003 .

[28]  Kenneth L. Kraemer,et al.  Institutional Factors in Information Technology Innovation , 1994, Inf. Syst. Res..

[29]  Richard Knepper,et al.  Digital Government Development Strategies: Lessons for Policy Makers from a Comparative Perspective , 2005 .

[30]  J. Holahan,et al.  Medicaid managed care in thirteen states. , 1998, Health affairs.

[31]  Colin J. Bennett,et al.  The lessons of learning: Reconciling theories of policy learning and policy change , 1992 .

[32]  Forrest V. Morgeson.  Expectations, Disconfirmation, and Citizen Satisfaction with the US Federal Government: Testing and Expanding the Model , 2013 .

[33]  P. May.  Policy Learning and Failure , 1992, Journal of Public Policy.

[34]  Yu-Che Chen,et al.  Outsourcing for E-Government , 2003 .

[35]  H. Rittel,et al.  Dilemmas in a general theory of planning , 1973 .

[36]  C. Weare,et al.  Institutional Motivations in the Adoption of Innovations: The Case of E-Government , 2011 .

[37]  Paul T. Jaeger,et al.  Identifying the security risks associated with governmental use of cloud computing , 2010, Gov. Inf. Q..

[38]  Ping Wang,et al.  Chasing the Hottest IT: Effects of Information Technology Fashion on Organizations , 2010, MIS Q..

[39]  G. Garson,et al.  Public Information Technology and E-Governance: Managing the Virtual State , 2008 .

[40]  K. Klein,et al.  The Challenge of Innovation Implementation , 1996 .

[41]  D. Moynihan,et al.  Cognitive Biases in Governing: Technology Preferences in Election Administration , 2012 .

[42]  James K. Scott.  “E” the People: Do U.S. Municipal Government Web Sites Support Public Involvement? , 2006 .

[43]  Stephen P. Osborne,et al.  The New Public Governance? 1 , 2006 .

[44]  W. Ocasio.  TOWARDS AN ATTENTION-BASED VIEW OF THE FIRM , 1997 .

[45]  Stuart Bretschneider,et al.  Management Information Systems in Public and Private Organizations: An Empirical Test. , 1990 .

[46]  M. Tushman,et al.  Exploration and Exploitation Within and Across Organizations , 2010 .

[47]  Christopher G. Reddick,et al.  Why e-government projects fail? An analysis of the Healthcare.gov website , 2016, Gov. Inf. Q..

[48]  Sukumar Ganapati,et al.  Uses of Public Participation Geographic Information Systems Applications in E‐Government , 2011 .

[49]  Eric W. Welch,et al.  E-Government and Bureaucracy: Toward a Better Understanding of Intranet Implementation and its Effect on Red Tape , 2006 .

[50]  Daniel A. Levinthal,et al.  The myopia of learning , 1993 .

[51]  P. John,et al.  What Do Bureaucrats Like Doing? Bureaucratic Preferences in Response to Institutional Reform , 2010 .

[52]  H. Rainey,et al.  Goal Ambiguity and Organizational Performance in U.S. Federal Agencies , 2005 .

[53]  J. C. Thomas,et al.  The New Face of Government: Citizen-Initiated Contacts in the Era of E-Government , 2003 .

[54]  S. Dawes.  The Evolution and Continuing Challenges of E-Governance , 2008 .

[55]  Jacob Torfing,et al.  New Public Governance , 2020, Public Governance Paradigms.

[56]  A. Ho,et al.  Explaining the Adoption of E-Government Features , 2004 .

[57]  R. Walker,et al.  An Empirical Evaluation of Innovation Types and Organizational and Environmental Characteristics: Towards a Configuration Framework , 2007 .

[58]  Sanjay K. Pandey,et al.  Public Managers' Perceptions of Organizational Goal Ambiguity: Analyzing Alternative Models , 2006 .

[59]  Stéphane Moyson,et al.  Policy learning and policy change: theorizing their relations from different perspectives , 2017 .

[60]  Carol Ting,et al.  Implementing Public Utility Commission Web Sites: Targeting Audiences, Missing Opportunities , 2009 .

[61]  C. Ansell,et al.  Collaborative Governance in Theory and Practice , 2007 .

[62]  P. Gillingham,et al.  Child Protection Practitioners and Decision-Making Tools: Observations and Reflections from the Front Line , 2010 .

[63]  Kristin R. Eschenfelder,et al.  Behind the Web site: An inside look at the production of Web-based textual government information , 2004, Gov. Inf. Q..

[64]  Michael Hill,et al.  Implementing Public Policy: Governance in Theory and in Practice , 2002 .

[65]  José Ramón Gil-García,et al.  Government innovation through social media , 2013, Gov. Inf. Q..

[66]  Tom Christensen,et al.  HOW TO ASSESS ADMINISTRATIVE REFORM? INVESTIGATING THE ADOPTION AND PRELIMINARY IMPACTS OF THE NORWEGIAN WELFARE ADMINISTRATION REFORM , 2010 .

[67]  Paul T. Jaeger,et al.  Using ICTs to create a culture of transparency: E-government and social media as openness and anti-corruption tools for societies , 2010, Gov. Inf. Q..

[68]  George Alexander Boyne,et al.  Escape from the Iron Cage? Organizational Change and Isomorphic Pressures in the Public Sector , 2007 .

[69]  P. Gillingham.  Electronic information systems in human service organizations: Using theory to inform future design , 2017 .

[70]  D. West.  E‐Government and the Transformation of Service Delivery and Citizen Attitudes , 2004 .

[71]  David H. Coursey,et al.  Models of E-Government: Are They Correct? An Empirical Assessment , 2008 .

[72]  Theresa A. Pardo,et al.  E-government success factors: Mapping practical tools to theoretical foundations , 2005, Gov. Inf. Q..

[73]  F. Damanpour,et al.  Combinative Effects of Innovation Types and Organizational Performance: A Longitudinal Study of Service Organizations , 2009 .

[74]  Daniel A. Levinthal,et al.  Exploration and Exploitation in Organizational Learning , 2007 .

[75]  M. J. Moon.  The Evolution of E-Government among Municipalities: Rhetoric or Reality? , 2002 .

[76]  Kenneth L. Kraemer,et al.  Information Technology and Administrative Reform: Will E-Government Be Different? , 2006, Int. J. Electron. Gov. Res..

[77]  J. E. Swiss.  Adapting Total Quality Management (TQM) to Government. , 1992 .

[78]  J. Brudney,et al.  The Adoption of Innovation by Smaller Local Governments: The Case of Computer Technology , 1995 .

[79]  Richard M. Walker,et al.  Management Innovation and Organizational Performance: The Mediating Effect of Performance Management , 2011 .

[80]  Jason L. Dedrick,et al.  Computing and Public Organizations , 1986 .

[81]  L. Argote.  Organizational Learning: Creating, Retaining and Transferring Knowledge , 1999 .

[82]  Sue White,et al.  Trust, risk and the (mis)management of contingency and discretion through new information technologies in children’s services , 2012 .

[83]  M. J. Moon,et al.  Advancing E‐Government at the Grassroots: Tortoise or Hare? , 2005 .